The U.S. Department of Justice has alleged that the University of California, San Francisco’s medical school illegally discriminated on the basis of race in its admissions process for the incoming classes of 2023, 2024, and 2025, as well as in its diversity pipeline programs.
The DOJ’s nine-page letter, sent to UCSF Chancellor Sam Hawgood on September 22, states that the school was 12.6 times more likely to admit Black applicants than white applicants with similar socioeconomic backgrounds, GPAs, and MCAT scores. The letter argues that UCSF’s admissions policies violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits racial discrimination in federally funded programs, and the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling in Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) v. Harvard, which banned race-based affirmative action in college admissions.
Key Allegations
The DOJ’s investigation found that UCSF’s admissions process prioritized race over academic qualifications, with MCAT scores and GPAs taking a back seat to racial preferences. The letter specifically cited UCSF’s stated goal of ensuring its student population “reflects the population of California,” which the DOJ argued amounted to outright racial balancing, a practice the Supreme Court deemed unconstitutional in the SFFA case.
The DOJ also alleged that UCSF’s diversity pipeline programs—designed to increase enrollment from underrepresented racial groups—excluded white and most Asian students. The letter stated that UCSF “openly admits that its goal is to increase enrollment from specific racial groups it designates as underrepresented minorities in medicine (URM).”
UCSF’s Response
In a statement, UCSF disputed the DOJ’s findings, asserting that its admissions practices comply with the law. A university spokesperson said, “We disagree with the DOJ finding. We will continue to engage constructively with the department and look forward to resolving this matter.”
The DOJ has given UCSF until October 2 to respond to its allegations. If the university does not agree to a voluntary settlement, the DOJ has threatened to file a lawsuit.
Federal Funding and Broader Context
UCSF receives nearly $1 billion annually in federal funding, with the majority coming from the National Institutes of Health (NIH)—$824 million in 2025 alone—for medical research. The DOJ’s allegations against UCSF follow similar findings against other UC campuses, including UC Berkeley’s law school, UCLA, UC San Diego, and UC Davis, all of which have disputed the DOJ’s conclusions.
Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon stated in a press release, “Aspiring doctors should be admitted based on their qualifications, not their race.”
Legal and Policy Implications
The DOJ’s letter reflects the federal government’s increased scrutiny of race-based admissions policies following the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision. The ruling in SFFA v. Harvard effectively ended affirmative action in higher education, prompting legal challenges to similar policies at other institutions.
UCSF’s case raises broader questions about how universities can achieve diversity in their student bodies while complying with anti-discrimination laws. The outcome of this dispute could set a precedent for how other medical schools and higher education institutions structure their admissions processes.